Packaging of libdb-6+
hhorak at redhat.com
Mon Apr 7 13:43:41 UTC 2014
On 04/03/2014 09:14 PM, Paul Howarth wrote:
> On Thu, 03 Apr 2014 15:53:04 +0200
> Honza Horak <hhorak at redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 04/03/2014 11:20 AM, H. Guémar wrote:
>>> Since AGPL is fedora-compliant license, there's no blocker to get
>>> libdb6 into packages collection.
>>> Besides, libdb5 is still critical for many packages (like RM), until
>>> we get rid of it, I can only agree with your proposal.
>>> Maybe, it's still time to rename the current libdb => libdb5 and get
>>> newer releases named libdb starting F21
>> This would be possible only by co-operation with the depended
>> packages, since they usually use "BuildRequire: libdb-devel". So
>> after just rebuilding those to link against libdb-6, some of the
>> packages would start to suffer from license incompatibilities. But I
>> agree that libdb-6.x + libdb5-5.x scenario looks better than
>> libdb-5.x + libdb6-6.x.
>> Anyway, to make some marketing for this change, we should have a Self
>> contained change page for this . Change Proposals Submission
>> Deadline is 2014-04-08 btw.
> It's not a self-contained change really. Without a good deal of
> co-ordination it'll end up causing problems like
> in which there are symbol conflicts when a process ends up trying to
> load two different versions of libdb.
I understand and agree that there is a risk of some issues, but the
issues won't have platform-wide influence imho, so this doesn't seem to
me like that we need to take this update as a system-wide change, if you
More information about the devel